Cybersecurity resilience: Merged IT and security vs. separate teams

Welcome reader to a 🔒 pro subscriber-only deep dive 🔒.

Brought to you by:

👉 Cypago - Cyber governance, risk management, and continuous control monitoring in a single platform

🧠 Ridge Security - The AI-powered offensive security validation platform

Forwarded this email? Join 70,000 weekly readers by signing up now.

#OpenToWork? Try our AI Resume Builder to boost your chances of getting hired!

—

Get lifetime access to our deep dives, weekly cyber intel podcast report, premium content, AI Resume Builder, and more — all for just $799. Corporate plans are now available too.

Executive Summary

Organizations face critical decisions about how to structure their cybersecurity operations to maximize resilience against increasingly sophisticated threats.

This whitepaper examines the key differences between organizations that have merged their IT and security operations versus those maintaining separate departments, based on global research through 2025.

Key findings include:

• Integrated IT-security teams demonstrate faster incident response, more consistent security practices, and greater operational efficiency.

• Separate teams maintain stronger governance independence but often experience slower incident containment and patch remediation.

• Successful organizations balance integration benefits with appropriate oversight, risk frameworks, and clear accountability mechanisms.

Leading enterprises are achieving superior resilience by thoughtfully integrating IT and security—preserving security’s distinct mission while eliminating harmful operational silos.

Introduction

The cybersecurity landscape continues to evolve at an unprecedented pace, with threat actors employing increasingly sophisticated tactics.

Organizations must therefore prioritize cybersecurity resilience—the ability to anticipate, withstand, recover from, and adapt to adverse cyber incidents—as a core business capability.

A key factor influencing resilience is organizational structure:
➔ Should IT and security be merged, separated, or partially integrated?

This whitepaper addresses a fundamental question:

Scope and Methodology

Our analysis draws from:

• Research studies and industry reports (2023–2025)

• Case studies across sectors globally

• Quantitative performance metrics from 150+ organizations

• Interviews with CISOs, CIOs, and security professionals

The findings focus on differences in incident response, vulnerability management, operational efficiency, governance, and cultural alignment.

Definitions

For clarity, we define the primary organizational models as follows:

Merged IT and Security Operations (Integrated Model): The security operations function is unified with IT operations, typically with both reporting to a single executive (often the CIO). This can include security as a dedicated function within IT, or fully embedded security responsibilities within IT roles.

Separate IT and Security Departments (Siloed Model): The cybersecurity team operates as an independent department, typically reporting to separate executive leadership (CISO reports to CEO, board, or risk officer, while CIO runs IT). Distinct reporting lines, budgets, and operational processes exist.

Hybrid Models: Various intermediate approaches that maintain some separation while establishing coordination mechanisms (security committees, fusion centers, matrix structures).

The Current Landscape

Evolution of Organizational Models

The relationship between IT and security functions has evolved significantly:

• Traditional Separation (Pre-2015): Security initially emerged as an IT sub-function but gradually separated to provide independent oversight during the early 2000s through 2015.

• Rise of the Strategic CISO (2015-2020): Many organizations elevated the CISO role to report outside of IT, reflecting security's expanded scope beyond technical controls.

• Integration Trend (2020-2025): Facing skills shortages, digital transformation pressures, and increasingly sophisticated threats, organizations began reexamining the benefits of closer IT-security alignment.

Prevalence of Different Models

Recent research indicates approximately 51% of organizations now operate with security as part of IT (integrated model), about 40% maintain separate security teams (siloed model), and the remaining 9% have either fully embedded security within IT without dedicated security staff or employ hybrid approaches. Larger organizations and regulated industries (financial services, healthcare) tend to favor separation, while technology companies and mid-market businesses often prefer integration for agility.

Key Differences in Cybersecurity Resilience

1. Incident Detection and Response Capabilities

One of the most critical dimensions of cybersecurity resilience is how effectively organizations detect and respond to security incidents.

Integrated Operations

Organizations with merged IT-security operations typically demonstrate:

• Faster detection times: A 2024 comparative study found integrated teams achieved Mean Time to Detect (MTTD) improvements of 37% compared to siloed peers, attributable to unified monitoring tools and elimination of handoff delays.

• Streamlined incident containment: With a unified chain of command, integrated teams reported 42% reductions in containment times during simulated incident response exercises, as technical responders could implement containment measures without departmental friction.

• Coordinated recovery processes: Organizations with integrated teams were 3.2 times more likely to recover from ransomware without paying ransom, largely due to better coordination between security incident response and IT disaster recovery functions.

• Unified visibility: Integrated security and network operations centers (SOC/NOC) demonstrated better correlation between network anomalies and security events, with 68% of potential security incidents identified first through IT monitoring systems rather than dedicated security tools.

Separate Departments

Organizations with distinct IT and security functions typically show:

• More comprehensive investigation: While initial detection and containment may take longer, separate security teams often conduct more thorough investigations, with 54% more IOCs (Indicators of Compromise) identified on average.

• Stronger post-incident governance: Organizations with separate security teams implemented more comprehensive post-incident remediation plans, with a 33% higher implementation rate of recommended security improvements following incidents.

• Potential response delays: Communication gaps between separate teams resulted in an average of 76 minutes of additional response time during critical incidents where coordination was required.

• Independent verification: Separate teams provide a "second set of eyes" on incidents, which can be valuable in catching misidentified or sophisticated attacks that might be overlooked by a single integrated team.

A 2023 global study of security incidents revealed organizations with integrated IT-security operations reduced their Mean Time to Resolution (MTTR) by 27% compared to organizations with separate departments. However, the most significant factor was not structure itself, but rather the existence of well-defined incident response processes and regular cross-team exercises.

2. Vulnerability Management and Risk Reduction

The proactive identification and remediation of vulnerabilities represents another key aspect of cybersecurity resilience.

Integrated Operations

Organizations with merged IT-security functions typically demonstrate:

• Faster patching cycles: The 2024 Vulnerability Management Index found integrated organizations remediated critical vulnerabilities 42% faster on average than those with separate teams.

• Higher patch completion rates: 86% of critical vulnerabilities addressed within SLA timeframes in integrated organizations versus 67% in siloed environments.

• Reduced friction in remediation workflows: Integrated teams eliminated handoffs between vulnerability identification (security) and implementation (IT), removing a key source of delay and miscommunication.

• Shared accountability: When both security and IT report to the same leader, patch prioritization conflicts diminished significantly with 74% fewer escalations needed for vulnerability remediation decisions.

Subscribe to CybersecurityHQ Newsletter to unlock the rest.